Giving birth at 63?

[dinahsmum]

:shock:
Not for me - what do you think?
Extraordinary

[carternm31]

I think its disgusting,

That poor child, when it goes to secondry school its parents will be in their 70's :shock: and when they are late teens they are going to start looking after their parents instead of themselves, which they should be doing at their age!

And to think, losing your parents when he/she will still be so young. I think these people are extremely inconsiderate! :mad:

[dinahsmum]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

[Sweet]

Not heard anything

[Kim]

I don't agree either. If nature wanted us to have children as late as this it would have made it possible. This child will alwys have 'old' parents who may never see him/her grow up and get married, have their own children etc, etc. I heard on the radio today that the chances of her having a normal birth is almost nil and she is at a high risk of raised BP, heart attack, stroke, etc. At this age I would like to be thinking about retirement, not sleepless nights!

[jenny]

i dont agree with it. i think its very selfish and irresponsible. this poor child will lose their parents when still so young. its hard at any age, but they wont be able to enjoy having them around for as long as most would like.

[yola]

I think its disgusting,

That poor child, when it goes to secondry school its parents will be in their 70's :shock: and when they are late teens they are going to start looking after their parents instead of themselves, which they should be doing at their age!

And to think, losing your parents when he/she will still be so young. I think these people are extremely inconsiderate! :mad:


I don't agree with it, but I certainly don't think it's disgusting. And for the record, not all persons of pension age are decrepit. My Mother is 80 and often has more energy than I have and is perfectly able to look after my toddler for quite long periods!!

My husband will be 55 when our new baby is born. Does that make him disgusting too? I hope not :shock:

I think nature needs to be a factor here. If the woman is still able to bear a child without assisted conception then she has every right to do so. However when, as in the case of this women, IVF or similar is used then it does cast a doubt over whether it's morally the correct decision. However, as the press does tend to distort and sensationalise things, and correct me if I'm wrong the story was led by that bastion of impartial reporting, the Sun, then we need to be fully certain of the facts before making hastly judgements.

[bobbie3917]

no thanks im in my 20s and my kids are hard work no thanks

[EmmaG]

I think the lady in question has lost the plot a bit, especially as she had to have IVF to have this baby. Also I do wonder how they have considered the effects on the child having parents who are going to be unusually old when they are a teenager.

Strange world we live in.

[Naomi]

Nope definately not for me thank you.

[bobbie3917]

i do agree with Yola if they can then carry on but when you cant no 1 should help you out

[Donna]

I would not consider it. I have done my bit for mankind!!! I think its a bit weird someone of 63 would want a baby!

[logoes]

I said NO kids after I'm 30, I remember the awful time my Mum and I went through when I was a teenager and she was going through the change. I can understand now that with modern maternity care and lifestyle many people wouldn't share my opinion but at 63!!!! No way - that poor child is nothing more that an experiment to satisfy someone's ego. Logoes

[Fran]

I too said that if I hadn't had children by the age of thirty then I wouldn't have any at all. I had Tom at 26 and Em a month after my thirtieth birthday. If I hadn't have had her then, I would never have had her at all. My mum and dad were 'older' parents and I hated it. My mum was 35 when she 'had' me and my dad was 47. I swore I would never be an 'older' parent.

[Booktigger]

I disagree with it, I dont think it is that fair on the child, and the fact that they need IVF for it is wrong - although GMTV did say that the doc who performed it has done a lot of controversial things as well, so I wonder if he agreed for his 'reputation'.

[smudgley]

Well I don't know all the facts about this lady - but I do kind of think - each to their own. I can see why people would think it's wrong - however I know some people who are that age & fitter than me - so I have mixed views.
I was married at 20 & pregnant with our first daughter at 22. & there's just 18 months between my 2. So I'm now 32 & my children are growing up nicely & we are all very happy. - {My hubby is 12 years older than me.}

[jenny]

was just thinking earlier, that those of u who think its wrong, which seems to be the majority, do u also feel its wrong for parents with diseases that are msot likely to be passed to the children should have children too?

i saw a program once where a woman had cystic fibrosis or something, and she had 3 children and each child also got this terrible disease. what are peoples views on this? is it morally right for people to have children knowing full well they could pass their disease onto their children and thus shortening their life or them leading a painful life?

[JemBob]

Its her life and her choice fair enough the childs parents will be old :? but its none of our business really, I dont understand why some people are getting so upset about it (heard on radio not on here :) ) but people are dying all over the world of diseases and hunger natural disaters, and where so intrested in this one women????

Life is to short enjoy what you can! You could die tomz! If this women wants a child at this age they so be it, ITS her life not ours, i bet the poor women will be getting enough hassle off people and media!

Rant over! :lol:

[Emm]

It wouldn't be something I would personally do but I also think each to their own.


When people say you shouldn't have kids when you are older because you could die when the child is young - well there is no guarantee to how long any of us have got - I have known a few young people who have died and left young children, I have also known of children that have died - there is no guarantee - no-one promises us that we will live a long life.

I don't have any children and I'm nearly 30. If I did decided to become a parent I will probably be an older parent but for me that would be better I don't feel ready to give everything required to a child and bringing them up yet. Everybodys different.

[Hreow]

There's no guarantee that you will live, but the odds are better of one parent surviving to turn 50, than 83. There are also the significantly increased odds of having a baby with, say Down's syndrome, at 63. In which case you have to make provisions for their care for much longer than twenty years or so.

I wouldn't, I don't feel it would be fair on the child, but your mileage may vary.

[carternm31]

I don't agree with it, but I certainly don't think it's disgusting. And for the record, not all persons of pension age are decrepit. My Mother is 80 and often has more energy than I have and is perfectly able to look after my toddler for quite long periods!!

My husband will be 55 when our new baby is born. Does that make him disgusting too? I hope not :shock:

I think nature needs to be a factor here. If the woman is still able to bear a child without assisted conception then she has every right to do so. However when, as in the case of this women, IVF or similar is used then it does cast a doubt over whether it's morally the correct decision. However, as the press does tend to distort and sensationalise things, and correct me if I'm wrong the story was led by that bastion of impartial reporting, the Sun, then we need to be fully certain of the facts before making hastly judgements.

I'm not saying i think your situation is disgusting, she is not ABLE to convieve naturally and i do not agree with the amount of drugs they give these people to be able to wait as long as they want. My parents are 65 and 63 and i found it hard as a child having older parents, and i know they didn't have the strength as say a 20-30 year old would, to run around after me when i was a young. Having a child at the ages you are is your decision, i am just voicing my opinion as i know what its like to have older parents.

[Julie84]

i found it hard as a child having older parents

I found it very hard as a child (mostly as a teenager) having such a young mum (she had me when she was 17). Children seem to be eternally embarrassed by their parents, regardless of age! ;) :lol:

I don't think it's really anybody's business whether they have children or not - who am I to decide whether it is right or wrong? I can see many benefits to being an older mum (and I think most 63 year olds would be better parents than the heaps of 13, 14, 15 year olds parents :? ).

[yola]

My parents were both in their 40s when they had my brother and myself. I was embarassed by their non-English accents but age didn't really come into it. OK - so my Dad didn't run around the garden with my brother and play football with him. But I don't think my brother suffered. Infact - I actually found my parents were willing to devote a lot of time to me (an him) to ensure that my potential was fulfilled and were more willing to make sacrifices for us that I suspect they may not have done had they been in their (for example) 20s, and a bit more into 'having a good time' etc.

carternm31 - I'm sure you're not saying my situation is disgusting - after all you weren't aware of it when you made the statement. I'm just questioning the strength of the particular word in this instance as it rather took me aback; and using my own case as an example.

I did have a further thought though concerning the 63 year old woman. Her child will be 17 when she's 80 (everyone in the press seems to be using the age of 80 as a benchmark so, so be it). It could well be that this child may well have a child of their own by then, either way it will be well on the way to being independent. Additionally, if this person is able to spend £50K on IVF treatments it's very likely that the child will have a financial support structure which will mean it won't suffer in any way and will be well provided for.

Either way - I'm certain it's a decision this couple did not enter into lightly and considered all factors prior to proceeding.

[Hreow]

Hmmm... think the child would prefer to have parents, rather than "financial support structure", but I suppose that does mean that it will be easier for someone who cares about the child to also take over the upbringing etc.

[Snoof]

I lost my mother when I was 15. In August, it'll be 9 years since she died, making me 24.

I still don't know how I'm going to live the rest of my life without her (and my brother, who died just short of a year later). Sometimes my son (who is 4) will do something, and I'll think, "Oh, I'll just have to ring them and tell them about it!" before realising that I can't, and will never be able to.

It's heartbreaking. If I had a much-higher-than-average chance of dying when my child was still young, I would choose not to have them.

But maybe she's extraordinarily healthy. Maybe she has a huge support system set up and doesn't realise that no number of caretakers will ever make up for it when she dies. I've been lucky in that Matt's family have adopted me without a second thought, but it doesn't make it better. It makes everything else better - they're wonderful people who love me and who have done quite a lot to make life easier on me, and have adopted Random even before they adopted me. But I still want my Mum, and my brother.

So no, I wouldn't do it. I can't personally imagine a scenario in which it would be a brilliant idea. But I can't control other people, or even know the ins and outs of their situations, so I try not to waste any time wondering if they're making a huge mistake or not, because it'll only do my head in :lol: